A Comment Conundrum

Mark, I’d like to post my say about your blog because you asked for that.
Your blog is used by all players and all parties and as you see popularity of your blog is just growing and your posts are reprinted in the main stream media.
We are attracted to your blog because you are a good and very intelligent moderator.
You have shown time and time again that you can be the best judge. I don't mind, you did not post two of my posts and you were right about them.
Your blog is about NT stock as well. The stock market consist of 2 opposite forces, Bulls vs Bears. Rating _smating
Bulls were able to get 250 negative ratings against the brightest poster on yahoo NT message board 4 years ago. Yes, anything he posted looked like a crazy talk for us who just didn't see the message. I know and remember all his messages and they were just brilliant to foresee the future. If the ratings of all idiots who did not like the message and the messenger would eliminate him from the game it would be a loss.
Yes, Bulls on NT did not argue the message just the messenger, his English language skills and other technical points. He would save money for those who listen to him; all who trusted him saved money.
Bulls on Yahoo accuse him of destroying NT stock. They accuse you of doing the same here! Haha
What a nonsense. If he is so powerful why they call him an idiot all the time? If he is so powerful he would be a millionaire now. Nope He is just one of the defrauded NT shareholders same as other 30 mill Joe Plumbers who invested in NT at the top. They lost about $300 bill!
If there were any logic in such accusation he would go to any stock message board and destroy any stock and make money shorting! Let ask him if he would destroy AAPL stock?
Why do I write it here?
Because even you, Mark, are sometimes expressing your fear to be labeled by Nortel.
I say, the day NT would accuse you of misleading or bashing would be the best day of your life. You would easily win the case and get more popularity than you dreamed about.
in conclusion
Mark, feel free to do whatever you wanted on this blog. It's your blog.
If someone does not like it, he/she should leave.
We will judge you for every post you make and you can trim our posts the way you have been doing it so far. Don't fix what is not broken.
btw
Few months from now there will be no more NT stock, so what's the problem?
and as I said wait for Q3 CC to see the new and lean NT! There is no more guessing games about what Mike Z will say…on my part.
One more trading day!

Nobody but you cares what happened years ago on what yahoo message board and who call you by what name back then.
it's your life, you don't HAVE to grow up, but seriously . . . isn't this story getting old?

Nortel doesn't care what happened to their stock 6 weeks ago, much less months, or even 6 years ago. Mondays' "Ever forward" as spoken by the CEO is all a potential customer and/or stock buyer needs to research.

I propose we throw yes4aapl off the blog!

Seconded. It's the same post every time.

Dear Mark, I think you should follow the lead of several popular websites by implementing a comment rating system where every comment can be either positively or negatively scored, and where the highest ranked comment goes to the top of the page and lowest rank comment goes to the bottom. Comments below a certain threshold, say -5, become invisible unless you specifically choose to read it. This way, nonsense comments are effectively self regulated down to obscurity.

Dear Mark, I think you should follow the lead of several popular websites by implementing a comment rating system where every comment can be either positively or negatively scored, and where the highest ranked comment goes to the top of the page and lowest rank comment goes to the bottom. Comments below a certain threshold, say -5, become invisible unless you specifically choose to read it. This way, nonsense comments are effectively self regulated down to obscurity.


The problem with a rating system like that,is that it eventually becomes bias and just reflects what the majority sentiment is,and just like on the yahoo board, Mark's blog has become overrun with negativity,hence most negative posts would end up being ranked high as a result.

I stopped reading the comments on stories (I read the blog though) basically because the vast majority had nothing constructive to say or were off topic negative rants.

Look at the comments below - how many are answering or discussing the question you posed? How many are merely negative rants.

I would be in facour of deleting all the off topic negativity and keeping it down to a small number of on-topic discussion points.

I agree this would be a lot of work but perhaps you could enlist some external moderators?

Your wasting your of time.

AAN will soon stand for All About Nothing, because Nortel will cease to exist within a year as its pulled apart and absorbed by other companies.

Start looking for another topic Mark.

Mark,
To be honest I don’t think ANN will mater that much in the next year or so. Nortel has continued to deteriorate and now the world economy is heading for recession for the next year or two. As much as I hate to say it, Nortel will most likely not be around in another year give or take, so why try and police this blog? It will be too much work, and how would you really know when someone had real solid information? I don’t think knowing that is very easy.

Mark, I'm sorry but I feel that this post of yours may be yet another tool out of the panderer's toolbox, if you will.
Based on how you are keeping this blog around so far, I believe that you know very well how this should be done and how you want it done!
So are you looking for confirmation?
If so, yes, you are the maverick, keep up the good job.
If not, please stop doubting yourself, you are doing just fine, let's talk about real issues instead.
Any news on the layoffs?

Here's one rough rule of thumb for screening content. If the blogger's message doesn't reach a threshold suggesting the need for anger management and/or is attempting to be factually accurate, keep it. Otherwise give it the hook.

What's the definition of "attempting to be factually accurate"? On the separate post about the Nortel Microsoft alliance, multiple comments from someone called "fact" (ironically) falsely claim the alliance will expire in a few months.

That comment has now been referenced as a "source" in another industry blog post: http://tinyurl.com/6zpfx3

Some idiot may post something completely false, but who will take it seriously? Only the other idiots :)
I'm sure it's a pleasure for yourself or other officials to come out and clear things up every once in a while.

I like it.

Mark
This site always seems to be negative about Nortel as are the commentators. Quite frankly , it is down right depressing to read. A lot of other company's are going through similar situations out there but don't seem to have this constant negative bantering going on. There is very little news about the positives that Nortel is working on , no comments on new business opportunities booked , tecknolgy advancements or break throughs made or anything else. Always the same rant and cut up management or BOD attitude. I thought ALL ABOUT NORTEL means positives or negative comments on the progress or situations in the company.
If comments are Rude, Obnoxious, Belligerent, or non constructive then cut off the poster permantenly. There is no room for any of this in any business.

There is nothing wrong with negative comments. Given the history, I would rather call most of those comments REALISTIC rather than negative. I believe it would be a shame if this blog was just another platform for cheer leaders to post their point of view without opposition. They already have Nortel blogs for that don't they?
I believe personal attacks and profanities should be removed, anything else is acceptable. No company has ever died from a dose or reality. NT is in a tough business, in a tough overall market and in a very tough position. So yes, it must be tough to hear some of the feedback from those who lost their best years of their careers or perhaps their life savings on it, but so be it. If I was NT management I'd listen, perhaps (not likely, but still) they could learn a little something as well.
This is very much a platform for investors to voice their opinion. I'm sure when NT stock starts hitting 52 week highs every day instead of 52 week lows, the tone here would be quite different as well. Would you then argue for censoring the cheer leaders? Somehow I seriously doubt it.

There is a difference between relaying bad news, and rumors, distortions and in some cases outright lies

Yes, but there is very little difference between "negative" lies and "positive" lies. We have been told many positive lies in the past too, but nobody except the idiot apple cheer leader brings that up. How ironic is that? :)
I'd really rather read something more coherent on that subject.

My point was simply that labeling posts "negative" or labeling posters "negative nellys" isn't going to help anyone.

Mark, as I stated previously, I think you're between a rock and a hard place because censorship is bad (I don't advocate that) but allowing the trolls to run unchecked will degrade the value of the blog until the trolls are all that's left, IMHO.

I have just a couple of suggestions...

1. Don't censor content. That's a lot of work and a slippery slope.

2. Publish a very basic code of conduct and enforce it with zero tolerance. An example could be something as simple as "no profanity and no irrelevant personal attacks on anyone or any group". You break the rule and you're gone. There is a difference between 'criticism' and 'personal attack', and while it may be difficult to articulate, it is not difficult to discern.

Tough one. Good luck.

ANW,

Thanks for the counsel. One thing I have enabled is the ability to "flag" a comment. It may be one way to have the community do some self-moderation.

Sounds like a good idea. The idea of being able to vote up/down comments seems to work at sites like Digg, etc. but can also sometimes silence unoffensive, but unpopular, viewpoints.

I guess it depends on your objectives are for this site.

Are you a journalist reporting on Nortel? Or are you running a forum for people to to complain, pontificate and cheer for Nortel's failure. It's obvious to me that this site is rapidly become the latter, most rants are filled with opinion, rumors, guesses and outright distortions. It's becoming a place where vitrol runs rampant and unchecked.

That you're asking the audience this question suggests that you're seeing the same thing. I think its time to start moderating the posts, or accept that people come here, not to read about what's going on, but to take anonymous cheapshots at Nortel's expense.

YOU WROTE: "NORTEL FAILED"! YELLOW JOURNALISM ALERT!!

http://www.nortel.com really doesn't offer that much insight into anything. The movement of the NT stock ticker alone is far more captivating to me. Inquiring minds typically ask "why, why, why" go and research and recon.

automate scanning posts for expletives, bad language, **in words
allow readers to rate messages for offensiveness and flag offenders
ban chosen ids of repeat offenders for a week

should be possible to put scripts in to do this.

some posts are unwarranted like the defamation attempt. no place for this. others are positive and negative. if someone cannot take it then post an opinion, ignore or move on.

interesting how we can flag a comment. now you can personally attack AND flag someone at the same time, how awesome is that?

and oh, sorry about that mark. i was just testing it out.

Thanks. :)

It is difficult to find objectivity. One usually takes a pro or con side of the argument.

Debate is meaningful in providing opposition to balance truths or explore insight from differing views.
Perhaps censorship would detract from this.

Which side is less ethical? Do we inhibit them? Posts speak for themselves anyway.

My verbose diatribe reiterating history to facilitate insight, like readers are retention challenged or something, detracts with redundance I must admit; even though it might lend itself to topic in defense. I will try to inhibit this as best I too am bias towards the company's actions and no individual aside from the figure heads that fall prey to commentary and contradiction, and I am not too shy to vent about it.

Although too much passion arises on either side of the argument, the general media is too dispassionate lacking speculation. or verifiable facts until they actually transpire. Here, we gain greater insight at the expense of emotion where even pinnacles of tolerance and sophism might fall victim. (or make a hardened criminal cowar, kidding) =)

Rather than negatively reinforce the bad, what about rewarding the good, give the proven poster's points.
Rate their substantiated claims that actually transpire consistently. Perhaps even higher when swimming against the tide and odds or contemporary thought. We should rate posters on forecasting /poll forecasts, like they do analyst star ratings to enhance who-is-who here. The ratings would unadulteratedly speak for themselves. =) This would alleviate multi-aliases influencing the voting like they do on the Yahoo message boards polluted their rating system. Let the results speak for themselves =)

...if you will kindly excuse the my own subliminal bias entrenched throughout this post and not so subliminally in others =) Well, perhaps some of my posts have been worth reading and won't detract from their merits like wading through tall mountains of dirt to find that tiny bit of gold =)

I don't agree with censorship of comments posted. I don't like the idea of someone else deciding for me what is or is not acceptable. If people reading and posting on this blog can't discern what comments need to be taken with a 'grain of salt' or realize some comments are just opinions and that 'some' are just playing the devil's advocate, they shouldn't spend time reading or posting on this blog.

I expect hatred in general has pretty much taken its last gasp as our new president takes the helm - because thats, uh, what all the countless positive-minded, progressive Internet sites out there virtually guarantee. Lets all just stay relaxed and give it a few weeks. The check is in the mail.

But, no, remove all these so-called "hate" sites out there and the Internet would probably shrink. Does Nortel want that?

Mark, my question to you is, what are your objectives for running All About Nortel? Do you still have interest in having a more direct dialog with Nortel and perhaps attending some of their future conferences etc?

If these types of things are part of what you would like to achieve then there are two critical things that need to be done to better manage the content on the blog.

1. Attacks on Nortel employees and executives must stop.
2. False statements that Nortel is breaking laws and rules must stop.

These two things will effectively stop you from ever achieving your goals if they are as stated above or similar to them.

I would also encourage you to invite people like Duncan Stewart to do a guest post from time to time. I found his post the other day to be very interesting and if this type of thing can continue I think it will increase the value of your blog.

TIC,

Thanks for the suggestions. I like the idea of guest bloggers, including Duncan.

Mark

Mark:

One of the main reasons why I read your blog are the insights brought by commenters. If you take it away, it won't be the same thing and I might not be interested in reading it anymore. On the other hand, moderating is a task that takes time. I would consider some filters to automatically take away plain and offensive posts and maybe recruit a couple of trusted and neutral moderators operating under guidelines, that could help you with this timing consuming task.
Another thing is to allow posts only after you register with a valid email address. People will still be able to post anonymously, however this extra step might reduce the number of people that just want to mess around.
Whaddaya think?

Mark,

As a big fan of your blog and a formerly active participant I strongly advise against ANY censorship outside the blatant and grossly defaming recent comment about John Roese.

At the end of the day we all recognize that each participant has a style of their own; we also recognize where such diatribe originates form (or whom) and then we are faced with a choice: read or do NOT read such postings. No different than TV; if a channel’s programming is offensive to one’s own sense of morality then one has the choice to switch it.

Censorship is a slippery slope towards no meaningful content, kind of like the stuff that comes out Nortel’s PR. No one reads it, no one cares, we all know is manufactured fluff. Keep it just the way it is and eliminate the truly defaming posts. Proto has a style he cannot hide under any other name, as do the rest of us. As we witnessed in the US last night choice is a very powerful tool…--bb

i'm in strong agreement. censorship, which i'm assuming would be controlled by mark, will be based on what mark thinks is offensive, uninteresting and not valuable. but there may be people who would appreciate comments by so called "trolls", just like there are people who choose not to read comments from them. if aan only had comments which mark approves of, then whats the point of even having comments? leave it or completely close it down.

I am a long time reader/first time poster!

Another option is for your readers to just ignore the posters who contribute ranting garbage. There posts by certain individuals that I don't waste my time or energy in reading.

And in ignoring these posters, we should also avoid commenting on what they write. Treat them like a 3 year old having a temper tantrum - the more you pay attention to them, the more fuel you add to their emotional outburst. If you ignore them, they might eventually learn that they won't get the attention they crave.

My fear in a heavier moderation is losing the more 'real-time' aspect to the discussions (if you become a gatekeeper/bottleneck).

Agreed, don't feed the trolls is standard fare nowadays online.

Maybe look at what other sites have done to mitigate trolling... i.e. Slashdot. Yahoo message boards is probably the best example of what can happen when trolls run amok and unrestrained. Soon enough you have posts like "9/11 INSIDE JOB?!?!?" or in the case of this blog it might be "MARK EVANS NORTEL INSIDE JOB!?!?"

Bannings will be difficult, since it is so easy to create a new anonymous name. Perhaps you need to make the registration of users much more burdensome. Something like... input an email address, then from the email address deduce the person's real name, and then assign that real name as the screen name. Essentially, the goal should be to make a commentor stand up for his/her comments, rather than hiding behind a screen name.

Real names aren't a good idea. That could put a lot of current employees in an awkward position and I would hate to lose the perspective they offer.

Mark, have to agree with Nortelguy. These are the same guys that post constantly on Yahoo and have nothing constructive to add. Its simply bashing and while I can understand why many are not happy with Nortel these days it adds nothing to life to spend so much time on wishing bankruptcy on a company.

I would suggest moderation, as long as actual points of view are not censored, so to speak. If it's a constructive comment, regardless of whether you, as the blog author, agree with the point of view, I'd say approve it. If it's nothing more than an "I agree" message, turf it; it brings no value, unless someone specifically asks if they are right, or if they are right. You may have to weed through much trash.

mark brings a smile to my face every time he says something like this because it's like watching a white collar criminal giving a stern words to a kid caught stealing from a candy store.

mark, lets first get some constructive, insightful, interesting or valuable posts up on aan and perhaps comments are to follow

I am curious what do you do here posting at all if you are not interested? pathetic...

i post my comments here because i can... still anyway.

first, lets just assume that i said i'm not interested.

are you trying to say that its pathetic because i posted a comment to say i wasn't interested, because i wasn't interested? or are you trying to say its pathetic because you're curious?

let me know if you didn't understand my comment above. i can pretty much spell it out for you

I think a "three strikes & then you are out" policy would strike a good balance between giving posters the ability to say what they mean, but reign in vicious attacks on the employees / management of the company.

As an employee of Nortel, AAN provides a good incite into the external perception of Nortel. Yes, we know we are in the ****. We know the exec team is as good as useless, we know the business needs to be streamlined (let's hope they target the right areas this time!), but there is no mileage in posters calling for X'000 cuts "& good riddance".

Agree with Nortel guy. By putting real names, you may restrict Nortel employees from voicing their thoughts. THe 3 strike policy works well. Ban any one who goes beyond the third warning.

Why do you think Nortel employees use this site? It is because their honest opnions cannot be heard within the Nortel walls. Granted, commentary shoud be constructive here, but if constructive feedback is spoken at Nortel, you're labelled a Nay sayer and targeted. We all know Executives monitor this site from time to time, so the open forum should remain. If somehting is blatantly ridiculous, then pull it! Diatribes from passionate employess is healthy for this site. I think you'll lose readership otherwise.

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. Much appreciated.

Mark

There are lots of haters on this site. For reasons such as maybe they lost a lot of money on NT. Or maybe they know someone who did. Or maybe they got pickles on their burger when they didn't ask for them, I don't know.

Best way to deal with trolls? Don't feed them. I'm as guilty as anyone else of this but remember trolls thrive on the hate they create, it's like an addiction.

I wouldn't mind just even a permaban on the first occurrence, it is the only way to stomp out this deviant behaviour. Let the mighty hand of Mr. Evans crush these petty instigators. It is his blog and he owns it, we are all just guests. If you invite someone over and they start trashing your place and calling you names, shouldn't you be able to throw them out?

Agreed. While it is difficult to police a site that tries to maintain a 'free speech' policy, some work needs to be done to cull the trolls. Perhaps implementing a 'Report Post' option, or allowing users to set post ratings, and posts below a certain rating get deleted or moved to a 'troll only' section so the trolls can enjoy each other's posts... Not sure what the technology allows with this particular blog s/w... something to look in to.

1. Attacks on Nortel employees and executives must stop.

Why should we stop this? It has generated some great conversation in the past..some good, some bad, but all passionate. Are we supposed to blog about only the positives? If so there won't be much to write about. Employees positive? Mostly yes! Executives positive? Very few. I for one think Mike is actually a good CEO however his cabinet is dreadful and many need the boot. The problem is, Mike is not in touch with the front line troops. His execs are all being brainwashed by old school (good ol boys club) Sr. Management and I do mean VP level. The SR. VP's haven't sniffed it out yet and if they haven't by now, they never will. Drastic changes are made. Keep up the attacks to sniff out the truth. Freedom of speech.

2. False statements that Nortel is breaking laws and rules must stop.
Agree with this...unless of course substantiated.

There's not point in censoring comments, we can make up our own minds what to read.

People come here to read the rumors. Everything else can be found in the press releases.

That said, unsubstantiated serious allegations pertaining to named executives or anyone else should be removed promptly. Libel is libel and even if you (Mark) don't get your ass sued, can you sleep at night knowing you may have provided a forum for the tarnishing of someone's reputation and even the destruction of their family life?

...which is why I'm pretty meticulous about comments. As a former reporter, I well aware of libel issues.

Mark